total BS (as to be expected)
---
From owner-poised(_at_)lists(_dot_)tislabs(_dot_)com Tue Oct 16 12:17:44 2001
From: "Jim Fleming" <jimfleming(_at_)prodigy(_dot_)net>
To: "James M Galvin" <galvin(_at_)acm(_dot_)org>, "Robert Elz"
<kre(_at_)MUNNARI(_dot_)OZ(_dot_)AU>
Cc: "vint cerf" <vcerf(_at_)MCI(_dot_)NET>, "pindar(_at_)HK(_dot_) Super. NET"
<pindar(_at_)HK(_dot_)Super(_dot_)NET>,
"linda(_at_)icann(_dot_) org" <linda(_at_)icann(_dot_)org>,
"karl(_at_)cavebear(_dot_) com" <karl(_at_)cavebear(_dot_)com>,
"edyson(_at_)edventure(_dot_) com" <edyson(_at_)edventure(_dot_)com>,
"quaynor(_at_)ghana(_dot_) com" <quaynor(_at_)ghana(_dot_)com>,
"junsec(_at_)wide(_dot_) ad. jp" <junsec(_at_)WIDE(_dot_)AD(_dot_)JP>,
"andy(_at_)ccc(_dot_) de" <andy(_at_)ccc(_dot_)de>,
"shkyong(_at_)kgsm(_dot_) kaist. ac. kr"
<shkyong(_at_)kgsm(_dot_)kaist(_dot_)ac(_dot_)kr>,
"hans(_at_)icann(_dot_) org" <hans(_at_)icann(_dot_)org>,
"mkatoh(_at_)mkatoh(_dot_) net" <mkatoh(_at_)mkatoh(_dot_)net>,
"ken. fockler(_at_)sympatico(_dot_) ca"
<ken(_dot_)fockler(_at_)sympatico(_dot_)ca>,
"f. fitzsimmons(_at_)att(_dot_) net"
<f(_dot_)fitzsimmons(_at_)att(_dot_)net>,
"Amadeu(_at_)nominalia(_dot_) com" <Amadeu(_at_)nominalia(_dot_)com>,
<ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org>,
<poised(_at_)lists(_dot_)tislabs(_dot_)com>
References:
<Pine(_dot_)BSF(_dot_)4(_dot_)21(_dot_)0110151308240(_dot_)24636-100000(_at_)two(_dot_)elistx(_dot_)com>
<8367(_dot_)1003245950(_at_)brandenburg(_dot_)cs(_dot_)mu(_dot_)OZ(_dot_)AU>
Subject: The IETF has no members ?
Date: Tue, 16 Oct 2001 11:21:18 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400
X-Mimeole: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400
Sender: owner-poised(_at_)lists(_dot_)tislabs(_dot_)com
Precedence: bulk
----- Original Message -----
From: "Robert Elz" <kre(_at_)munnari(_dot_)OZ(_dot_)AU>
Certainly the way the IETF works, in all regards, is different to
most other organisations - not having any real defined members as
such makes a difference.
If you recall, the notion that the IETF has no members changed when
ICANN arrived on the scene. At the IETF meeting in Sweden, when,
ICANN was recruiting followers for the PSO, the IETF, W3C and
ETSI were considered equals. Apparently, the IETF people objected
and noted that ETSI has a small number of members. Someone else
apparently noted that the IETF has no members, and is therefore
smaller than ETSI. In order to become part of ICANN, the IETF had
to quickly talk out of the other side of its mouth and claim to have
thousands of members.
Jim Fleming
http://www.IN-ADDR.INFO